July 12, 2013

Litigation Limelight

Limelight Networks v. Akamai sits before the Supreme Court, awaiting
a decision as to certiorari. At issue is whether an accused infringer "may
be held liable for inducing patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) even though no one has committed direct
infringement under §271(a)." The root problem was incompetent prosecution, in
drafting claims that neglected to render a single party culpable.

Hal Wegner points to the PTO for not examining claims for the defect of
identifying a single infringer: "The first lesson is the inadequacy of the
patent licensure examination." Beyond that, Wegner blames the patent system:
"The patent licensure procedure defects go way beyond the "all elements" rule.
Earliest reform of the current system is necessary." But Wegner is pointing his
finger in the wrong direction.

The simple fact is that most prosecutors are not especially competent. Patent
Hawk sees many defective patents on a daily basis, with a wide variety of
problems, from claim defects to disclosure deficiencies.

Most prosecutors are unaware of how patents are enforced. As they confine
their practice to prosecution, largely ignorant of litigation, they just don't
know what a good patent is.

If you want a quality patent, by a prosecutor that works in litigation,
contact Platinum Patents.